AG 1998 02 16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

487 or more but less than 150 acres--two connections; and a land owner with more than 150 acres--three driveway connections; (7) The land owners would reserve land (but not dedicate) sufficient for a 50- foot right-of-way from the center of existing Derita Road and Poplar Tent Road in order to permit a widening of Derita Road and Poplar Tent Road by the North Carolina Department of Transportation should the NCDOT so elect; (8) Certain classifications of general industrial use would be excluded. (9) Except as noted in 24 above there would be no internal buffers between tracts owned by differing land owners (i.e., no buffer between, for example, the FUNB property and the Holland property even if developed as "separate" developments); and (10) The actual size Of individual sites will vary and will not be limited to seven (7) acres (actual size will be determined by actual use and may be more than or less than seven (7) acres). The Excluded Uses for the General Industrial-Special Use as agreed to by the Petitioners and approved by the Board were as follows: Asphalt and concrete plants; foundries/iron, steel mills; railroad stations and storage yard; sawmill; slaughterhouse/meat packaging; truck stop/truck terminal; communications tower - stand alone cellular tower; salvage yard; airport, commercial; airstrip; coliseum and stadium; extraction of earth products; landfill, demolition - more than one acre; landfill/sanitary; race tracks/animal and mechanical; and tire recapping. Also included as a condition of the approval of Petition 97-19 was the approval of the request by one of the petitioners, Moyle Motley, that his rights to permit up to six (6) residential units be vested for two years. His parcel was identified as PIN 4680-61-7495. Welfare Reform / County Work First Block Grant Plan - Mr. Jim Cook Mr. Jim Cook, Social Services Director, reported the proposed Welfare Reform/County Work First Block Grant Plan was placed on display throughout the county for public comment on January 12 - 17. He recommended the following modifications to the Plan in response to comments from Legal Services of the Southern Piedmont and the American Civil Liberties Union: 1) Delete the existing item VII.C.4. on page 15, and add new wording to the effect that "Individuals who are not exempt from work registration must register with /st stop before being approved for Work First Assistance.' 2) Delete the existing item VII.G. on page 19 and add new wording to the effect that "The State appeals system will be used in all instances except those arising from policies unique to the county. For those issues, a system identical to the State system will be used, except that the second level appeal will be heard by a local attorney or other impartial person engaged by the County to serve as Hearings Officer." UPON MOTION of Commissioner Mills, seconded by Commissioner Barnhart and unanimously carried, the Board took the following action: (1) thanked the Welfare Reform Planning Committee for its work; (2) approved the submission of the County Work First Block Grant Plan with the modifications as prsented by Mr. Cook and with the stipulations and understandings as set forth below; (3) agreed to request the County's legislative delegation to seek an extension of the Work Over Welfare Program, an addition of pay for performance provisions and a broadening of coverage to all Work First Program recipients; (4) agreed to request the County's delegation support measures which would remove the risks and costs associated with electing status; and (5) agreed to schedule a review of the County's requested status prior to the General Assembly's action on the State Work First Program Block Grant Plan this summer. Stipulations: 1) Assistance Payments: To protect them from an unfair financial risk, electing counties must be permitted to draw funding for assistance payments from the same pool of funding used by standard counties if their funding requirements for assistance payments exceed their block grants. This should be the case except where the excessive costs have resulted from the county's having set eligibility or payment policies more liberal than the policies for standard counties. 2) Community Work Experience Requirement. As it would be prohibitively expensive and perhaps impossible for electing counties to meet the requirement that they provide community work experience for all able-bodied adults who cannot find work, this program component must be made optional for electing counties as it is for standard counties.